Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

Auwrrlv 11.TrCXAe
PRICE DANlEL
ATTORNEYGENERAL
July 6, 1950

Hon. J. C. McEvoy Opinion No. V-1082
County Attorney
Waller County Re: The authority of the
Hempstead, Texas Commissioners'Court
to spend county funds
for a private fair

Dear Sir:
Your request for an opinion is as follows:
“In the year 1946, citizens of this
Waller County associated themselves to-
gether and formed a corporationand there-
after a charter was duly issued to such
corporationunder the laws of the State
of Texas in the name of Waller County Fair
Association;its capital stock is $259000.
Since its Incorporation,the Waller County
Fair Associationhas purchased some I.5
acres of land and has erected various ag-*a,fl~
_
rlcultural, horticulturaland lfvestock"CX-~',',*.
,,:
hibit bufldlngs at a cost of about $35"0@; '
It has conducted annual fairs slnce"l$&;"'
Although it is set up as a corpora$ion for

blllty for the
its entirety.
Court does
fairs contfnued,and to
the FaS.rAssociationin
nual exhibits of horticulturaland aip'i&l-
tural products, livestock and mineral pPq-
ducts, and such other products as aye of"
Hon. J. C. McEvoy, page 2 (V-1082)

Interest to the community. The Commisslon-
ers' Court is consideringentering Into a
contract, on behalf of Wailer County, with
the Fair Associationwhereby the Fair As-
sociationwould provide the buildings,
grounds and agricultural,horticultural
and livestock exhibits, for which Waller
County would pay,to the Fair Association
the sum of $2,000.00 or $3,000.00;under
such contract it is contemplatedthat the
'first gate' charge heretoforemade would
be eliminated,and the people of Waller
County would be entitled to be admitted,
without charge, to all of the exhibits and
all of the fair, save and except the rodeo,
for which a separate charge would be made,
as has been done heretofore.
"The Commissioners'Court is desirous
of being advised whether they may lawfully
enter Into such a contract, and, If so,
whether advertisementfor bids under Art.
2368a would be required."
You further state In your brief that under
the proposed contract the Waller County Fair Assocla-
tlon "would provide for the 1950 exhibits of hortlcul-
tural and agriculturalproducts, livestockand mineral
products, and other products as are of Interest to the
community,without an admission charge to the public."
Article 2372d, V.C.S., provides In part.:
'Section 1. All counties in the State
acting by and through their respectiveCom-
missioners'Courts may provide for annual
exhibits of horticulturaland agricultural
products, livestock and mineral products,
and such other products as are of Interest
to the community. In connectiontherewith,
such counties may also establishand maln-
taln museums, Including the erection of the
necessary buildings and other Improvements,
In their own counties or in any other coun-
ty or city In the United States, where fairs
or expositionsare being held.
. .

Hon. J. C. McEvoy, page 3 (V-1082)

"Sec. 2. The Commlesfoners'Courts
of the respective counties or the Commls-
sloners'Courts of several counties may co-
operate with each other and participatewith
local Interests In providing for the erec-
tion of such buildings and other lmprove-
ments as may be necessary to accomplish the
purpose mentioned In-Section1, of this Act
and for the assembling,erecting, and maln-
tainlng of such horticulturaland agricul-
tural, livestock and mineral exhibits, and
the expenses Incident thereto...."
Article 2372d authorizescounties to construct
buildings and other permanent Improvementsfor exhibits
of horticultural,agricultural,livestock,and mineral
products and to provide for such exhibits. Adams v.
McGill, 146 S.W.2d 332 (Tex. Clv. App. 1941, error ref.).
Itour opinion that counties are authorizedunder
Article 2372d In providing such exhibits to contract
with various individualsand associationsfor the as-
sembling, erection, and maintenance of such annual ex-
hibits as will best promote horticulture,agriculture,
livestock raising, and the developmentof natural re-
sources so long as such contract Is not In violation of
the Texas Constitution.
In this connection,It should be noted that It
was held In Attorney General's Opinion No. O-2629, dated
August 22, 1940, that Sections 51 and 52 of Article III
of the Constitutionof Texas prohibit the Commlssloners~
Court from making a donation or contributionto any ln-
-dlvidual or associationsuch as a "County Fair Associa-
tion." sunder the facts submitted in your request, how-
ever, Waller County does not propose to make a donation
to the WaLler County Fair Association. On the contrary,
the Commissioners1Court intends to contract for the use
.ofthe buildings and ground8 owned by the Fair Associa-
tion In holding the 1950 annual county fair and to employ
the association to assemble, maintain, and operate such
exhibits as will best carry out the purposes of Article
2372d.
The Court in Bland v. City of Taylor, 37 S.W.
2d 291 (Tex. Clv. Ap -l931) affirmed In 123 Tex. 39,
67 S.W.2d 1033 (19347: In s&talning the validity of a
tax levied for the purpose of "The establishmentand
maintenance of a Board of City Development,Chamber of
Hon. J. C. McEvoy, page 4 (V-1082)

Commerce, or other similar organizationunder whatsoever
name, devoted to the growth, advertizement,development,
Improvementand Increase of the taxable values of said
city," held:
"The provisionsof the Constitution
which appellantsassert are violated are:
Article 3, % 52; article 8, % 3; and arti-
cle 11, % 3. By article 3, % 52, the Leg-
islature la prohibited from granting to any
city, etc., power to lend Its credit or
grant money or thing of value to any ln-
dlvidual, association,or corporationwhat-
ever. Article l.1,PI3, prohibits any coun-
ty, city, or municipalityfrom making any
appropriationor donation or in any wise
loaning Its credit to any private corpora-
tion or association.
"These provisions clearly contemplate
and prohibit, we think, benefits at public
expense attempted In behalf of individuals,
corporations,or associations,as such, act-
ing independentlyand conductingsome enter-
prise of their own, such as are usually con-
ducted for profit and commercial in their
nature. In the Instant case no aid was at-
tempted to the chamber of commerce, acting
as an Independentassociation. The city
undertook to, and did, create said board of
city developmentwith defined duties, not
to aid any association,but as a part of its
municipal functions. Obviously,we think,
there was no violation of article 3, % 52,
nor of article 11, % 3, of the Constitution.
"If In fact said,city had authority
under the Constitutionand laws of the state
to do the things authorizedby its charter,
it Is wholly Immaterialwhether such board
of city developmentsupplanted a private as-
sociation theretoforemaintained by private
subscription." (Emphasisadded)
We therefore agree wjth the conclusionreached
by you In your able brief that the Commiselonero'Court
of Wailer County has the authority under the provisions
of Article 2372d to contract with the Waller County Fair
Hon. J. C. McEvoy, page 5 (v-1082;

Associationfor the use of its buildings and exhibits
ip holding the 1950 Waller County~Fairand to employ
the assoclatlon to assemble, erect, and maintain ex-
hibits for.the promotfon and developmentof horticul-
ture, agriculture,livestock ~aisfng, and mineral pro-
ducts In the State and County ir I!!*the discretionof
the Court It determines that the purposes of Article
23726 can best be carHed.out by such a contract.
Section 2 of Aptlcle 2368a, V.C,S., provides,
In part, that:
"No county, acting through its Com-
missioners Court, and no cf,ty!n thl,sState
shall hereafter make any contract callfng
for or requfrfng the expendetureor payment
of Two Thousand ($2,000.00)Dollars or more
out of any fund OP funds of any city or
county or subdivision of any county creat-
ing or imposing an oblfgatfo:nor lfabilfty
of any nature or character upon such county
or any subdfvislonof such county, or upon
such city, without first submittfng such
proposed contract to competftfvebids...."
Article 2372d specificallyprovides that the
provisions of Artid? 2368a are not repea3~edby Its pro-
visions. It Is our opfnfon that 811~cethe contemplated
contract calls for an expznditme of $2,000,00 or more,
the contract may only be awarded orecompetitivebids.
SUMMARY
---.-
Under the provfsfons of Article 2372d
the CommzLssfoneraDCou& of Wailer County
has the authority to contract with a fair
assocPatfon for the use of the a,ssocfatfon's
buildings and employ the aatiocfatfonto as-
semble, erect, and mair&ain exhibits for the
promotI.onand developmentof horticulture,
agriculture,livestock raising, and mineral
products in the State and County. Adams v.
McGill, 146 S.W.2d 332 (Tex. Civ. App. 1941
error ref.); --__
Bland v. City of Ta lor
S.W.?d 291 (Tex. CXv.I-
App.-&irizd '
in 123 Tex. 39, 67 S.W.2d X0:33(1934). Since
the contract calls fog an expenditureof
Hon. J. C. McEvoy, page 6 (V-1082)

$2,000.00 0P more, it must be submltted
to competitive bids. Art. 2368a, V.C.S.
Yours very truly,
PRICE DANIEL
APPROVED: Attorney General
J. C. Davis, Jr.
County Affairs Division
Joe R Greenhill John Reeves
First Assistant Assistant

JR:mw:db